Dr.RenalNash said:

The GIP arm is doing real work rather than padding the label.

I read this differently from Dr.RenalNash, on substance rather than tone. The "tirzepatide is simply better" summary irritates me. It is better on mean weight loss, and the cardiovascular outcome evidence is far thinner than semaglutide's. If the reason for treating is cardiovascular risk rather than weight, the evidence base points the other way.

One concrete data point for the thread. Give anything pharmacological four weeks before you judge it, and give anything measured weekly a four-point rolling average before you call it a trend.

RetaRick_CA said:

The "tirzepatide is simply better" summary irritates me.

There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. Take it one variable at a time. Almost every unanswerable question in these threads is unanswerable because three things changed in the same fortnight, and no amount of subsequent argument can untangle them after the fact.

Following on from KarenAZ_mom — and this may be the naive question:

How much of the tirzepatide advantage is the GIP component and how much is simply that the dose ladder goes higher in receptor-occupancy terms?

OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.

Update: the eight-week restart pattern people described is exactly what happened. I nearly abandoned it at week five.